–Sandeep Suresh, LL.M in Comparative Constitutional Law (Central European University, Budapest) In this weekly feature, I-CONnect publishes a curated reading list of developments in public law. “Developments” may include a selection of links to news, high court decisions, new or recent scholarly books and articles, and blog posts from around the public law blogosphere. To

—Richard Albert, Boston College Law School We know a lot about the theory of judicial review. We also know a lot about how the power of judicial review is exercised and why it has emerged in many constitutional democracies around the world. For example, Tom Ginsburg has theorized what he calls the insurance model of judicial review in

—Juliano Zaiden Benvindo, University of Brasília Ran Hirschl, in his book Towards Juristocracy, raises a very thorough argument on how political, economic, and judicial elites have strategically used Supreme Courts as “a form of self-interested hegemonic preservation.”[1] As a way of keeping many of their interests virtually untouched for years, especially in democratic and pluralistic

[Editor’s Note: We are pleased to announce the birth of Evan Yingling, son of Stephanie and Patrick Yingling, last week on Tuesday, October 18. Patrick has been an integral part of the What’s New in Public Law team since the very first edition was published almost three years ago. Please join Tom Ginsburg, David Landau and me

[Editor’s Note: In this special post, Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Luís Roberto Barroso shares his notes from an address given to students at the Yale Law School on September 22, 2016. We are grateful to Justice Barroso for this contribution to I-CONnect. –Richard Albert] —Luís Roberto Barroso, Justice, Supreme Court of Brazil; Professor of Law, Rio de

—Maxime St-Hilaire, Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Sherbrooke Earlier this week on Monday, October 17th, Prime Minister (PM) Justin Trudeau announced the elevation of Justice Malcolm Rowe from the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador (Court of Appeal) to the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC). Filling the vacancy left by Justice Thomas Cromwell’s

[Editor’s Note: In this installment of I•CONnect’s Article Review/Response Series, Grant Hoole reviews Robert Leckey’s recent article in I•CON on The Harms of Remedial Discretion. Leckey then responds to the review.] Review of Robert Leckey’s “The Harms of Remedial Discretion” —Grant Hoole, University of New South Wales Robert Leckey has raised an important dissenting voice challenging the

–Simon Drugda, Nagoya University Graduate School of Law (Japan) In this weekly feature, I-CONnect publishes a curated reading list of developments in public law. “Developments” may include a selection of links to news, high court decisions, new or recent scholarly books and articles, and blog posts from around the public law blogosphere. To submit relevant developments for

—Leonid Sirota, AUT Law School Sir Geoffrey Palmer and Andrew Butler, now both barristers with an academic past, the former also once an Attorney-General, Justice Minister, and briefly Prime Minister, have published a book arguing that New Zealand needs for a codified, entrenched constitution for New Zealand ― something the country famously lacks at present. They

—Richard Albert, Boston College Law School Bruce Ackerman’s theory of “constitutional moments” has traveled the world as scholars have applied it outside the United States. Juliano Zaiden Benvindo has drawn from the theory to examine recent constitutional changes in Brazil, Sujit Choudhry has applied the theory to Canada in connection with Quebec secession, and Dario Castiglione has explored

Submit to I·CONnect

We welcome substantive submissions via email on any subject of comparative public law. Submissions usually, though not always, range from 750 to 1000 words. All submissions will be reviewed in a timely fashion.
Please send submissions to contact.iconnect@gmail.com.